# American Exceptionalism



## nhboy

...


----------



## vraiblonde

History wasn't ol' Bill's strong suit, was it?  Settlers were slaughtered by Native Americans simply for existing.  They fought each other for territorial dominance before white people ever showed up.  That's why the government started sending in federal enforcement and negotiating all those policies/treaties in the first place, to open up the territories for settlement.

We can argue that the Indians had a right to defend their turf and run off intruders.  But we cannot realistically pretend that they were all peaceful and chit, not bothering anyone, until white devils showed up.  That's simply not the way it was by any historical account, and you've been watching too many Billy Jack movies if you think so.


----------



## nhboy

vraiblonde said:


> *History wasn't ol' Bill's strong suit, was it?*  Settlers were slaughtered by Native Americans simply for existing.  They fought each other for territorial dominance before white people ever showed up.  That's why the government started sending in federal enforcement and negotiating all those policies/treaties in the first place, to open up the territories for settlement.
> 
> We can argue that the Indians had a right to defend their turf and run off intruders.  But we cannot realistically pretend that they were all peaceful and chit, not bothering anyone, until white devils showed up.  That's simply not the way it was by any historical account, and you've been watching too many Billy Jack movies if you think so.



lol!


----------



## vraiblonde

nhboy said:


> lol!



He didn't have the internet.


----------



## Larry Gude

vraiblonde said:


> History wasn't ol' Bill's strong suit, was it?  Settlers were slaughtered by Native Americans simply for existing.  .



Whaaaa????????? Yeah, existing in the Injun's back yard. "Tonto! White man in back yard! Seem to be playing corn hole and watching American Idle!"   

"Ugh.... me whomp 'um!" 


I would think the Slaugher-o-meter is a bit weighed in our favor, wouldn't you?


----------



## mamatutu

I think this might be the first time I have liked your post.  Buffalo Bill got it a long time ago.  Despite the good intentions of our Founding Fathers, I think many great men have seen the writing on the wall for a long time.  All Americans are now victims of our government, no matter which side;, work or not, on welfare or not, corporate or not, Dem/Repub or not, occupy Wall Street or not, illegal alien or not, black/white, or not, etc.  A house divided against itself cannot stand.  Abraham Lincoln was right all those years ago; he just didn't know how right he was.  I am sure he would be very inconsolable at this point, if he knew; just like Mary was when he was assassinated.  It changed her whole existence, as ours is being changed now.  This is for you TJ...JMO!

When all said and done, Buffalo Bill exploited Native Americans, too with his shows.  He, also, contributed, greatly to the almost demise of the buffalo.  He was a truther, but, also, a hypocrite.  He probably would have fit right in to our current existence.


----------



## vraiblonde

Larry Gude said:


> I would think the Slaugher-o-meter is a bit weighed in our favor, wouldn't you?



Of course, but that wasn't the subject.  The original statement by Buffalo Bill inferred that the government caused every case of Indian violence, and I submit that that is not true.

I also said that we can indeed debate whether the Injuns were right to defend their land - and I'm sure most of us would agree that they were.  However throughout history, "to the victor go the spoils".  In this particular conflict, whitey was the victor and got the spoils.  "We" aren't original in that aspect - it's been done since the beginning of time and still happens to this day.


----------



## mamatutu

vraiblonde said:


> Of course, but that wasn't the subject.  The original statement by Buffalo Bill inferred that the government caused every case of Indian violence, and I submit that that is not true.
> 
> I also said that we can indeed debate whether the Injuns were right to defend their land - and I'm sure most of us would agree that they were.  However throughout history, "to the victor go the spoils".  In this particular conflict, whitey was the victor and got the spoils.  "We" aren't original in that aspect - it's been done since the beginning of time and still happens to this day.



Injuns and whitey in your words.  No respect there.  You think you are above all that happens.  No surprise there.  And, I think you missed the true meaning of his words.  And, he was a hypocrite.  Go figure.

Buf Bil exploited the Indians as much as the government did.  I think he was one of the first libprog Dems.


----------



## Hank

mamatutu said:


> Injuns and whitey in your words.  No respect there.  You think you are above all that happens.  No surprise there.  And, I think you missed the true meaning of his words.  And, he was a hypocrite.  Go figure.



 

You are Sunday wasted tonight, Doll Baby!


----------



## tommyjo

mamatutu said:


> I think this might be the first time I have liked your post.  Buffalo Bill got it a long time ago.  Despite the good intentions of our Founding Fathers, I think many great men have seen the writing on the wall for a long time.  All Americans are now victims of our government, no matter which side;, work or not, on welfare or not, corporate or not, Dem/Repub or not, occupy Wall Street or not, illegal alien or not, black/white, or not, etc.  A house divided against itself cannot stand.  Abraham Lincoln was right all those years ago; he just didn't know how right he was.  I am sure he would be very inconsolable at this point, if he knew; just like Mary was when he was assassinated.  It changed her whole existence, as ours is being changed now.  This is for you TJ...JMO!
> 
> When all said and done, Buffalo Bill exploited Native Americans, too with his shows.  He, also, contributed, greatly to the almost demise of the buffalo.  He was a truther, but, also, a hypocrite.  He probably would have fit right in to our current existence.



Once again your opinions are those of an idiot.

We are not victims of govt. IF we are all victims, then it is plainly due to the stupidity of the average American (who doesn't understand our system of govt, who believes everything they read  in emails or on conspiracy websites, who can't do basic math, or who thinks Paris Hilton's wearing or not wearing of panties is news). Of which you are a prime example. Once again you offer not a fact, not a piece of information, just your idiotic inflammatory opinion. You would be a perfect Fox News host. 

When you walk down the street, how loud is the whistle created by the wind blowing thru that space between your ears?


----------



## GURPS

vraiblonde said:


> Settlers were slaughtered by Native Americans simply for existing.  They fought each other for territorial dominance before white people ever showed up.




La guerre de la Conquête - each side had Nations fighting with them / on their behalf


----------



## Larry Gude

vraiblonde said:


> Of course, but that wasn't the subject.  The original statement by Buffalo Bill inferred that the government caused every case of Indian violence, and I submit that that is not true.
> 
> I also said that we can indeed debate whether the Injuns were right to defend their land - and I'm sure most of us would agree that they were.  However throughout history, "to the victor go the spoils".  In this particular conflict, whitey was the victor and got the spoils.  "We" aren't original in that aspect - it's been done since the beginning of time and still happens to this day.



I think you are talking about ALL Injun' violence including pre treaties. I read the comment to mean, using the word 'outbreak' as violence post treaty, meaning Bill says AFTER a treaty it was always the honkies what started the #### stirring. 

So, the critical difference here is pre treaty violence and post treaty violence. At least as I understand it. 

What this has to do with 'American Exceptional-ism" is beyond me.


----------



## GURPS

Larry Gude said:


> What this has to do with 'American Exceptional-ism" is beyond me.




it was a dig at America of course ..

 ... insert  'America is Sooooo Exceptional, look at how they treated Native Americans'

would it be a moral equivalency argument to point out this was a European thing going on for 100's or yrs .... look at the Colonial period in Africa or the Boxer Rebellion in China


----------



## Larry Gude

GURPS said:


> it was a dig at America of course ..
> 
> ... insert  'America is Sooooo Exceptional, look at how they treated Native Americans'
> 
> would it be a moral equivalency argument to point out this was a European thing going on for 100's or yrs .... look at the Colonial period in Africa or the Boxer Rebellion in China



If meant to be it sorta leaves out that 'Indians' were Americans, too. And first. 

We have this odd understanding that Native American's were, somehow, the pure people who never lied, stole or cheated nor took anything that didn't belong to them. Of course, the idea of 'American Exceptional-ism' is absurd to begin with.


----------



## GURPS

Larry Gude said:


> If meant to be it sorta leaves out that 'Indians' were Americans, too. And first.
> 
> We have this odd understanding that Native American's were, somehow, the pure people who never lied, stole or cheated nor took anything that didn't belong to them. Of course, the idea of 'American Exceptional-ism' is absurd to begin with.





progressives all like to stand in a circle and bemoan the peaceful blue aliens [oops wrong group] err  I mean natives that lived in peace and harmony with nature and never harmed a soul, until that evil YT man came along ....


----------



## GURPS

Larry Gude said:


> ..... the idea of 'American Exceptional-ism' is absurd to begin with.




:shrug:


----------



## vraiblonde

Larry Gude said:


> Of course, the idea of 'American Exceptional-ism' is absurd to begin with.



I disagree.  We are an exceptional people.  In terms of what we have invented and developed in this country, then given to the world, we are head and shoulders above any other nation.  Are we perfect?  Of course not.  But the measure of our exceptionalism is that we have created enough prosperity that we no longer scrabble for food every day, and have time to sit around on our asses talking about what a crappy country we live in.  We not only keep each other for pets, we keep other countries as pets.  THAT, my friend, is exceptional.


----------



## Larry Gude

vraiblonde said:


> We not only keep each other for pets, we keep other countries as pets.  THAT, my friend, is exceptional.



We have built a nation the founders envisioned and did everything they could to hand us the tools to avoid it. 

I suppose we're exceptional from a certain perspective.


----------



## vraiblonde

Larry Gude said:


> We have built a nation the founders envisioned and did everything they could to hand us the tools to avoid it.



But you can't stop humans from being human.  It's what we do.


----------



## Larry Gude

vraiblonde said:


> But you can't stop humans from being human.  It's what we do.



Exceptionally well.


----------

